Design Management Project
| Structure Type: | Course |
|---|
| Code: | KH14BAGR35 |
|---|
| Type: | Compulsory |
|---|
| Level: | Bachelor |
|---|
| Credits: | 8.0 points |
|---|
| Responsible Teacher: | Savola, Esa |
|---|
| Language of Instruction: | Finnish |
|---|
Course Implementations, Planned Year of Study and Semester
| Curriculum | Semester | Credits | Start of Semester | End of Semester |
| MK-2013 |
3 autumn |
5.0 |
2015-08-01 |
2015-12-31 |
| MK-2013 |
3 spring |
3.0 |
2016-01-01 |
2016-07-31 |
Learning Outcomes
The student is able to apply the principles of Design Management in practice
- The student creates applications related to different areas of Design Management in a practical situation
- The student implements a Design Management project as group work
- The student shows project management capabilities in their actions and works in a goal-oriented way in a group
- The student is able to co-operate with the ordering party, to make a relevant invitation to tender, and to communicate with suppliers of goods, etc.
- The student has an ambitious attitude towards their work and is interested in feedback. They have a critical attitude towards their work and are able to assess it from different viewpoints.
Student's Workload
guided exercises 112 h, independent study 92 h
Prerequisites / Recommended Optional Courses
Basics of Graphic Design, Corporate Graphics, Design Management
Contents
Practical applications of Design Management
Recommended or Required Reading
To be announced at the beginning of the course
Mode of Delivery / Planned Learning Activities and Teaching Methods
exercise
Assessment Criteria
0 FAILED
1 SATISFACTORY (POOR)
Design process develops poorly with different stages unclearly defined, personal achievements and counselling in unbalance, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) not clearly organized and analyzed, background work for design commission minimal, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively poor, routine like, mechanical) barely acceptable compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) only moderately (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and mechanically developed by student.
2 SATISFACTORY (FAIR)
Design process develops satisfactorily with different stages at least partially defined, personal achievements and counselling still in some respect unbalanced, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) satisfactorily organized and analyzed, background work for design commission in most respect satisfactory but with little source criticism, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively modest, routine like but with some personal traits) satisfactory compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) satisfactorily (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and with some personal traits developed by student.
3 GOOD
Design process develops fairly good with different stages clearly defined, personal achievements and counselling are in most respect balanced, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) in main respects well organized and analyzed, background work for design commission is good with adequate source criticism, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively good, fairly innovative and with clear personal traits) good compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) good (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and with clear personal traits developed by student.
4 GOOD (VERY GOOD)
Design process develops very good with different stages very clearly defined, personal achievements and counselling are in all respect balanced, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) in all respects well organized and analyzed, background work for design commission is very good with clear source criticism, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively very good, clearly innovative and with strong personal traits) very good compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) very good (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and with very personal traits developed by student.
5 EXCELLENT
Design process develops independently with different stages sharply defined, personal achievements and counselling are excellently balanced, specification(s), goal(s) and criteria for intended product(s) in all respects excellently organized and analyzed, background work for design commission is extremely good with clear source criticism, quantity and quality of design work (iteratively excellent, very innovative and with artistic personal traits) excellent compared to time used, presentation(s) (customer meeting(s), portfolio, partial deliveries, assessment discussions, final delivery, complementary deliveries etc.) excellent (overall comprehensiveness, visual and verbal quality) and with strong and artistic personal traits developed by student.
Assessment Methods
Outputs of workshop activities 100 %
Back